One person one vote
-
as an outsider it is easy to see that this ballot initiative is NO DIFFERENT from what a democratic majority would push
if it had the means to do so- If it served their self interests
making the changes to the Ohio constitution "harder' by a 60% majority instead of current simple 50% +1 is
in my opinion visionary and proactive in response to whats been happening elsewhere in the US.
protecting against progressive creep is an excellent start.
the OP source is also "biased" to the leftist leaners wanting to place naysaying on the abortion issue - even though there is no call to do so
besides, elections have consequences right BArry? a republican majority seems to grate on some folks here dont it?
Id say yes to issue 1
-
unions want the 51% because they, like the dem party, vote as a "BLOCK in big cities, making a 51% win far easier for them to rule,
rather than a 60% vote to change the Ohio Constitution.
Seriously, Bob,
I do mean "seriously". leave it as it is, because it has been easier for socialist/communist unions to vote as a block, like all dems do, because you have far more impact than affecting dominance in a 60% vote?
come on, now. That is union sponsored bs.
If hard core dem radical cities and the leftwing unions can vote in a block and break a close vote every time, they win !
of COURSE they don't want it changed. IT will take away their block voting advantage.
"only 51% to CHANGE THE OHIO CONSTITUTION" ??????????????????
yeah, read up on it - and realize WHY is needs to be changed - radical unions, college students, welfare abusers, all democrats, baby murderers WANT an easier time.
oh, and outlawing AR-15s will nevr happen with 60%.
yeah, they are desperate to keep their advantage.
Sorry Union Bob, I disagree with you again.
Did you read the link Cal?
Firstly, unions or no unions, if the will of the people to do a ballot initiative is stymied (if this passes) that's a big no-no.
SB 5 in 2010. A big campaign donor had it rammed through our statehouse, despite people opposing it 70%- 30%. ALEC sponsored it.
Fortunately we were able to get a grass roots campaign, signatures to put it on the ballot where it was soundly overturned 66%- 34%.
So on that specific issue, a big time donor (ALEC) was sent home & the will of the people, the voters, prevailed. Thank goodness.
If it smells fishy, it's most likely fishy.
Secondly, I realize you're anti-union. A group of elected legislators trying to change state constitution(s) are far more dangerous....once again, it's because of the Citizens United decision.
Did you read the link Cal?
yep
*************************
Firstly, unions or no unions, if the will of the people to do a ballot initiative is stymied (if this passes) that's a big no-no.
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
Read my lips, er, never mind - vote FOR issue one to give all of Ohio's population protection against a slim majority in the House putting a radical leftwing idea on the ballot. It is easier for them to lever pretend arguments to sway a few folks to their side, enough to simply put a bad idea on the ballot and let the people decide.
I do NOT want bad ideas getting on the ballot. SO, pass Issue One - and only GOOD ISSUES will get to the ballot - ideally.
Because if a leftist radical idea gets on the ballot, the unions/leftist giant cities/etc voting blocks will happily vote in a bad idea that is not representative of what the majority of folks actually support. The radical voting blocks should not have the power to leverage a slim margin in the House, to get a radical agenda issue on the ballot. I say that because of the lies - their ulterior motives don't match their fake public rational to get people to vote on ideas.
Made it harder for bad ideas to be passed by the legislature - period. Good ideas are far more easily supported by both parties. Controversial issues should stand the test of a higher vote than 51%.
**********************************************
SB 5 in 2010. A big campaign donor had it rammed through our statehouse, despite people opposing it 70%- 30%. ALEC sponsored it.
Fortunately we were able to get a grass roots campaign, signatures to put it on the ballot where it was soundly overturned 66%- 34%.
Sorry, Bob, but you just made my point. That big campaign donor can NOT pull that one off at 60%. Bad ideas should NOT be easy to get put onto the ballots. Thanks, man !
***********************************************
Secondly, I realize you're anti-union.
I am not anti-union, I am anti socialist unions. I keep referring you to the AFL-CIO. Go back and look at Richard Trumka. I've given you the link before. Here's another one:
There is evidence that the top man, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is a socialist sympathizer, perhaps even a covert D.S.A. member. Consider Trumka's record with D.S.A.; Every year since the mid 1960s the Indiana based Eugene V. Debs Foundation has held the Eugene Debs Award Banquet in Terre Haute, to honor the late socialist leader. The ...*************************************
A group of elected legislators trying to change state constitution(s) are far more dangerous....once again, it's because of the Citizens United decision.
That decision happened because of the unions/democrats/radicals political frivolous lawsuit against Citizens United for doing a film and airing it what the left said was "too close to the election", which was blatant nonsense.
Guess what the movie was?
https://citizensunitedmovies.com/pages/rigged
"Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, desired to air and advertise Hillary: The Movie, a film critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton, ahead of the 2008 Democratic primary elections."
The effect of that ruling is a clusterfook - on both sides.
but campaign finance abuses were a clusterfook to begin with.
Lastly, I realize that you are super pro-union no matter what. You need to break from the union group think and look at the real picture on issues.
-
You realize this is for the state of Ohio, right?
And you're going to sit there and continue to ask me questions and derail this back and forth after just ignoring my earlier post pointing out multiple things you said that were incorrect? Feel free to respond to that first
What I realize is that those who advocate abortion on demand any reason anytime will vote no making that goal easier. I don't know how much simpler I can make it for you?
WSS
What I realize is that those who advocate abortion on demand any reason anytime will vote no making that goal easier. I don't know how much simpler I can make it for you?
WSS
Again, ignoring other parts of that post.
Also you said "Well in this case abortion on demand anywhere anytime for any reason looks like it's on the line" ... And it isn't. It isn't on the line here. It isn't on the line in the follow up election. What you said is objectively false.
-
Did you read the link Cal?
yep
*************************
Firstly, unions or no unions, if the will of the people to do a ballot initiative is stymied (if this passes) that's a big no-no.
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
Read my lips, er, never mind - vote FOR issue one to give all of Ohio's population protection against a slim majority in the House putting a radical leftwing idea on the ballot. It is easier for them to lever pretend arguments to sway a few folks to their side, enough to simply put a bad idea on the ballot and let the people decide.
I do NOT want bad ideas getting on the ballot. SO, pass Issue One - and only GOOD ISSUES will get to the ballot - ideally.
Because if a leftist radical idea gets on the ballot, the unions/leftist giant cities/etc voting blocks will happily vote in a bad idea that is not representative of what the majority of folks actually support. The radical voting blocks should not have the power to leverage a slim margin in the House, to get a radical agenda issue on the ballot. I say that because of the lies - their ulterior motives don't match their fake public rational to get people to vote on ideas.
Made it harder for bad ideas to be passed by the legislature - period. Good ideas are far more easily supported by both parties. Controversial issues should stand the test of a higher vote than 51%.
**********************************************
SB 5 in 2010. A big campaign donor had it rammed through our statehouse, despite people opposing it 70%- 30%. ALEC sponsored it.
Fortunately we were able to get a grass roots campaign, signatures to put it on the ballot where it was soundly overturned 66%- 34%.
Sorry, Bob, but you just made my point. That big campaign donor can NOT pull that one off at 60%. Bad ideas should NOT be easy to get put onto the ballots. Thanks, man !
***********************************************
Secondly, I realize you're anti-union.
I am not anti-union, I am anti socialist unions. I keep referring you to the AFL-CIO. Go back and look at Richard Trumka. I've given you the link before. Here's another one:
There is evidence that the top man, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is a socialist sympathizer, perhaps even a covert D.S.A. member. Consider Trumka's record with D.S.A.; Every year since the mid 1960s the Indiana based Eugene V. Debs Foundation has held the Eugene Debs Award Banquet in Terre Haute, to honor the late socialist leader. The ...*************************************
A group of elected legislators trying to change state constitution(s) are far more dangerous....once again, it's because of the Citizens United decision.
That decision happened because of the unions/democrats/radicals political frivolous lawsuit against Citizens United for doing a film and airing it what the left said was "too close to the election", which was blatant nonsense.
Guess what the movie was?
https://citizensunitedmovies.com/pages/rigged
"Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, desired to air and advertise Hillary: The Movie, a film critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton, ahead of the 2008 Democratic primary elections."
The effect of that ruling is a clusterfook - on both sides.
but campaign finance abuses were a clusterfook to begin with.
Lastly, I realize that you are super pro-union no matter what. You need to break from the union group think and look at the real picture on issues.
It's concerning how much you're just repeating yourself now.
But fyi, as much as you hate this, the votes of union members, college students, and city folk don't count for less. 50k voters all living in Cleveland count the same as 50k voters scattered across the countryside. Just because you don't like how someone votes doesn't mean their vote counts for less (radical concept for conservatives, I know, considering their current love for voter suppression and gerrymandering).
-
What I realize is that those who advocate abortion on demand any reason anytime will vote no making that goal easier. I don't know how much simpler I can make it for you?
WSS
Again, ignoring other parts of that post.
Also you said "Well in this case abortion on demand anywhere anytime for any reason looks like it's on the line" ... And it isn't. It isn't on the line here. It isn't on the line in the follow up election. What you said is objectively false.
Again, ignoring other parts of that post.
Also you said "Well in this case abortion on demand anywhere anytime for any reason looks like it's on the line" ... And it isn't. It isn't on the line here. It isn't on the line in the follow up election. What you said is objectively false.
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Again, ignoring other parts of that post.
Also you said "Well in this case abortion on demand anywhere anytime for any reason looks like it's on the line" ... And it isn't. It isn't on the line here. It isn't on the line in the follow up election. What you said is objectively false.
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
I hate that abortion became such a political issue and causes so much division.
Simply put, the economy & safety and security are the main concerns for this voter. I'll never understand how abortion could trump those issues, even after chatting with people who consider that the #1 thing.
Karlis Missed -
Did you read the link Cal?
yep
*************************
Firstly, unions or no unions, if the will of the people to do a ballot initiative is stymied (if this passes) that's a big no-no.
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
Read my lips, er, never mind - vote FOR issue one to give all of Ohio's population protection against a slim majority in the House putting a radical leftwing idea on the ballot. It is easier for them to lever pretend arguments to sway a few folks to their side, enough to simply put a bad idea on the ballot and let the people decide.
I do NOT want bad ideas getting on the ballot. SO, pass Issue One - and only GOOD ISSUES will get to the ballot - ideally.
Because if a leftist radical idea gets on the ballot, the unions/leftist giant cities/etc voting blocks will happily vote in a bad idea that is not representative of what the majority of folks actually support. The radical voting blocks should not have the power to leverage a slim margin in the House, to get a radical agenda issue on the ballot. I say that because of the lies - their ulterior motives don't match their fake public rational to get people to vote on ideas.
Made it harder for bad ideas to be passed by the legislature - period. Good ideas are far more easily supported by both parties. Controversial issues should stand the test of a higher vote than 51%.
**********************************************
SB 5 in 2010. A big campaign donor had it rammed through our statehouse, despite people opposing it 70%- 30%. ALEC sponsored it.
Fortunately we were able to get a grass roots campaign, signatures to put it on the ballot where it was soundly overturned 66%- 34%.
Sorry, Bob, but you just made my point. That big campaign donor can NOT pull that one off at 60%. Bad ideas should NOT be easy to get put onto the ballots. Thanks, man !
***********************************************
Secondly, I realize you're anti-union.
I am not anti-union, I am anti socialist unions. I keep referring you to the AFL-CIO. Go back and look at Richard Trumka. I've given you the link before. Here's another one:
There is evidence that the top man, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is a socialist sympathizer, perhaps even a covert D.S.A. member. Consider Trumka's record with D.S.A.; Every year since the mid 1960s the Indiana based Eugene V. Debs Foundation has held the Eugene Debs Award Banquet in Terre Haute, to honor the late socialist leader. The ...*************************************
A group of elected legislators trying to change state constitution(s) are far more dangerous....once again, it's because of the Citizens United decision.
That decision happened because of the unions/democrats/radicals political frivolous lawsuit against Citizens United for doing a film and airing it what the left said was "too close to the election", which was blatant nonsense.
Guess what the movie was?
https://citizensunitedmovies.com/pages/rigged
"Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, desired to air and advertise Hillary: The Movie, a film critical of then-Senator Hillary Clinton, ahead of the 2008 Democratic primary elections."
The effect of that ruling is a clusterfook - on both sides.
but campaign finance abuses were a clusterfook to begin with.
Lastly, I realize that you are super pro-union no matter what. You need to break from the union group think and look at the real picture on issues.
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
I guess I didn't convey my point properly...I'd much rather have the voters get the opportunity to initiate a ballot proposal than have some crazy super PAC do it.
Additionally, yeah Trumka is a nutjob, but you have nutjobs everywhere, like Soros, the Koch Bros, etc. Unions aren't ever going to match the amount of $$ Soros and the Koch Bros. put up.
Karlis Missed -
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
I guess I didn't convey my point properly...I'd much rather have the voters get the opportunity to initiate a ballot proposal than have some crazy super PAC do it.
Additionally, yeah Trumka is a nutjob, but you have nutjobs everywhere, like Soros, the Koch Bros, etc. Unions aren't ever going to match the amount of $$ Soros and the Koch Bros. put up.
I guess I didn't convey my point properly...I'd much rather have the voters get the opportunity to initiate a ballot proposal than have some crazy super PAC do it.
Additionally, yeah Trumka is a nutjob, but you have nutjobs everywhere, like Soros, the Koch Bros, etc. Unions aren't ever going to match the amount of $$ Soros and the Koch Bros. put up.
And don't forget the Rothchilds who are worth 500 trillion or more... They are in on this too...
-
I’m all for making it more difficult to change or add/delete amendments.
If you keep it as a simple majority rule, the incumbent party can change it at will.
I think something as important as that should be a bipartisan consensus.
There’s a reason it’s difficult to change on the Federal level. . .
-
I’m all for making it more difficult to change or add/delete amendments.
If you keep it as a simple majority rule, the incumbent party can change it at will.
I think something as important as that should be a bipartisan consensus.
There’s a reason it’s difficult to change on the Federal level. . .
I’m all for making it more difficult to change or add/delete amendments.
If you keep it as a simple majority rule, the incumbent part can change it at will.
I think something as important as that should be a bipartisan consensus.
There’s a reason it’s difficult to change on the Federal level. . .
I am thankful for the thoroughness our forefathers took to try and protect freedom and the pursuit of happiness and the right to bear arms... And to allow religious freedom so long as it was not a danger to its citizens and other denizens of our society... It's one of the great things I love about this country.. While no one system is ever completely perfect.. I love the general concept that was taken from Grecco/Roman Ideology with several tweaks as it were... I thank my Grand parents on both sides for having the impetus to uproot their lives to give me and my siblings the opportunities we have been afforded... That takes great courage...
-
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
I hate that abortion became such a political issue and causes so much division.
Simply put, the economy & safety and security are the main concerns for this voter. I'll never understand how abortion could trump those issues, even after chatting with people who consider that the #1 thing.
I hate that abortion became such a political issue and causes so much division.
Simply put, the economy & safety and security are the main concerns for this voter. I'll never understand how abortion could trump those issues, even after chatting with people who consider that the #1 thing.
I am with you Bob. No matter what the issue too many people on either side goes straight for the talking point handbook.
We are not nor will we ever met to be a true democracy. I've got my theories as to why but it's a fact nonetheless.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
I hate that abortion became such a political issue and causes so much division.
Simply put, the economy & safety and security are the main concerns for this voter. I'll never understand how abortion could trump those issues, even after chatting with people who consider that the #1 thing.
I am with you Bob. No matter what the issue too many people on either side goes straight for the talking point handbook.
We are not nor will we ever met to be a true democracy. I've got my theories as to why but it's a fact nonetheless.
WSS
I am with you Bob. No matter what the issue too many people on either side goes straight for the talking point handbook.
We are not nor will we ever met to be a true democracy. I've got my theories as to why but it's a fact nonetheless.
WSS
Right on!
-
Again, ignoring other parts of that post.
Also you said "Well in this case abortion on demand anywhere anytime for any reason looks like it's on the line" ... And it isn't. It isn't on the line here. It isn't on the line in the follow up election. What you said is objectively false.
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
Ah so "bottom line" you're now completely ignoring the earlier post you made and refusing to acknowledge where it was pointed out as incorrect, gotcha.
Of course the special election is really about abortion. That's the point. Republicans are the ones trying to make people believe it's about out of state influence or whatever (and irs clear from this thread their base is falling for that).
If this was proposed in a vacuum it would be one thing. But it is being proposed by republicans as a last ditch attempt to stop the will of the majority of Ohioans. But Reps are all about pushing things through that the majority doesn't agree with so... here we are.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Bottom line again nobody gives a fuck about this. It's abortion and I know where you stand. Next time it will be about something else and people will switch hats. Advocates and detractors are mischaracterizing this vote and this measure for their own purposes.
WSS
Ah so "bottom line" you're now completely ignoring the earlier post you made and refusing to acknowledge where it was pointed out as incorrect, gotcha.
Of course the special election is really about abortion. That's the point. Republicans are the ones trying to make people believe it's about out of state influence or whatever (and irs clear from this thread their base is falling for that).
If this was proposed in a vacuum it would be one thing. But it is being proposed by republicans as a last ditch attempt to stop the will of the majority of Ohioans. But Reps are all about pushing things through that the majority doesn't agree with so... here we are.
Ah so "bottom line" you're now completely ignoring the earlier post you made and refusing to acknowledge where it was pointed out as incorrect, gotcha.
Of course the special election is really about abortion. That's the point. Republicans are the ones trying to make people believe it's about out of state influence or whatever (and irs clear from this thread their base is falling for that).
If this was proposed in a vacuum it would be one thing. But it is being proposed by republicans as a last ditch attempt to stop the will of the majority of Ohioans. But Reps are all about pushing things through that the majority doesn't agree with so... here we are.
Not sure why you insist on bickering over nothing. I know you're kind of obsessed with Republicans and I know abortion is one of your bigger issues, it just isn't mine. Maybe you actually believe that a simple majority is a better way to decide constitutional matters than a 60/40 vote. If you do feel free to make your point.
My guess is that regardless of the party that wants the nuclear option in any situation is doing it so they don't have to gain widespread support for whatever issue it may be. If you don't think so that's life.
However it's worded and whomever is in favor I just think that a 60/40 vote gives whichever side is advocating something a higher bar to attain. That's it.
WSS
-
It's concerning how much you're just repeating yourself now.
But fyi, as much as you hate this, the votes of union members, college students, and city folk don't count for less. 50k voters all living in Cleveland count the same as 50k voters scattered across the countryside. Just because you don't like how someone votes doesn't mean their vote counts for less (radical concept for conservatives, I know, considering their current love for voter suppression and gerrymandering).
It's concerning how much you're just repeating yourself now.
But fyi, as much as you hate this, the votes of union members, college students, and city folk don't count for less. 50k voters all living in Cleveland count the same as 50k voters scattered across the countryside. Just because you don't like how someone votes doesn't mean their vote counts for less (radical concept for conservatives, I know, considering their current love for voter suppression and gerrymandering).
AGAIN, as most al lhe time, you miss the point. I don't even think it's on purpose anymore.
I said BLOCK voting. BOCK. AS in, the entire? union tells all the members to vote a certain way - most of them do it.
I repeat myself beside you and a few others do not listen, don't understand what you read, misinterpret what you read, don't watch any video that comes from any poster that isn't a leftwing emotional knee jerk sombeitch.
I said nothing about union votes counting for less? Are you really mentally challenged or what?
I said those rock solid block votes from certain unions and groups - vote in the 90 percent of what the going groupthink is. Like the clack ommunity in Philly - 98.x % all over dem?
The POINT is, those block voting groups, like you, do not vote on the merits of an issue in regards to helping their country be better. They vote for the lies told to them, and free stuff.
Those groups want ONLY a 51% to have a dramatically better chance of winning elections with their reps in the Ohio House, and if they can get it on the ballot, a huge benefit to getting a bad issue passed. They LOSE control that they have, if a 60% is required to get an issue that they want on the ballot. Their block voting can sway a close election.
That is the point of making the House percentage 60 percent.
You never grasp any issue outside of your own ignorance, ability to think critically.... you just lose out.
-
That isn't right - the will of the minority to initiate a RADICAL initiative, by a slim margin of union block votes and large democratic socialist/radical voting blocks, despite a majority of other folks who OPPOSE that racialism, is greatly enhanced with the slim 51% margin. Bob - if an initiative is valid for the majority, that validity should be passed at 60%. 51% gives the minority large voting blocks tremendous power, which is unfair. At 60% - it far more represents the will of ALL the states' folks, not just unions/college student groups/large leftwing cities. Your union wants block voting power. They LOSE that power a lot if it is raised to 60%.
In other words - union dominant districts elect union reps. radical dominant districts with large radical populations elect radical leftist reps.
I guess I didn't convey my point properly...I'd much rather have the voters get the opportunity to initiate a ballot proposal than have some crazy super PAC do it.
Additionally, yeah Trumka is a nutjob, but you have nutjobs everywhere, like Soros, the Koch Bros, etc. Unions aren't ever going to match the amount of $$ Soros and the Koch Bros. put up.
I guess I didn't convey my point properly...I'd much rather have the voters get the opportunity to initiate a ballot proposal than have some crazy super PAC do it.
Additionally, yeah Trumka is a nutjob, but you have nutjobs everywhere, like Soros, the Koch Bros, etc. Unions aren't ever going to match the amount of $$ Soros and the Koch Bros. put up.
ok, but consider this - passing issue one and making it harder to a few bought off by super pac reps in the House will not be able to make an easy difference, Bob.
Raising it to 60% makes the super pacs influence a hell of a lot harder. They surely won't find that many reps in the House to buy off - we are all safer.
That is my point - pass issue one, don't let special interests have the power to get to 51% so easily. At least, that is how I see it.
-
When democrats are unanimous on an issue, go the opposite way.
This appears to be a pro-active approach by the Reps to protect the Constitution from the ever-growing leftist lunacy that's out there.
-
It's concerning how much you're just repeating yourself now.
But fyi, as much as you hate this, the votes of union members, college students, and city folk don't count for less. 50k voters all living in Cleveland count the same as 50k voters scattered across the countryside. Just because you don't like how someone votes doesn't mean their vote counts for less (radical concept for conservatives, I know, considering their current love for voter suppression and gerrymandering).
AGAIN, as most al lhe time, you miss the point. I don't even think it's on purpose anymore.
I said BLOCK voting. BOCK. AS in, the entire? union tells all the members to vote a certain way - most of them do it.
I repeat myself beside you and a few others do not listen, don't understand what you read, misinterpret what you read, don't watch any video that comes from any poster that isn't a leftwing emotional knee jerk sombeitch.
I said nothing about union votes counting for less? Are you really mentally challenged or what?
I said those rock solid block votes from certain unions and groups - vote in the 90 percent of what the going groupthink is. Like the clack ommunity in Philly - 98.x % all over dem?
The POINT is, those block voting groups, like you, do not vote on the merits of an issue in regards to helping their country be better. They vote for the lies told to them, and free stuff.
Those groups want ONLY a 51% to have a dramatically better chance of winning elections with their reps in the Ohio House, and if they can get it on the ballot, a huge benefit to getting a bad issue passed. They LOSE control that they have, if a 60% is required to get an issue that they want on the ballot. Their block voting can sway a close election.
That is the point of making the House percentage 60 percent.
You never grasp any issue outside of your own ignorance, ability to think critically.... you just lose out.
AGAIN, as most al lhe time, you miss the point. I don't even think it's on purpose anymore.
I said BLOCK voting. BOCK. AS in, the entire? union tells all the members to vote a certain way - most of them do it.
I repeat myself beside you and a few others do not listen, don't understand what you read, misinterpret what you read, don't watch any video that comes from any poster that isn't a leftwing emotional knee jerk sombeitch.
I said nothing about union votes counting for less? Are you really mentally challenged or what?
I said those rock solid block votes from certain unions and groups - vote in the 90 percent of what the going groupthink is. Like the clack ommunity in Philly - 98.x % all over dem?
The POINT is, those block voting groups, like you, do not vote on the merits of an issue in regards to helping their country be better. They vote for the lies told to them, and free stuff.
Those groups want ONLY a 51% to have a dramatically better chance of winning elections with their reps in the Ohio House, and if they can get it on the ballot, a huge benefit to getting a bad issue passed. They LOSE control that they have, if a 60% is required to get an issue that they want on the ballot. Their block voting can sway a close election.
That is the point of making the House percentage 60 percent.
You never grasp any issue outside of your own ignorance, ability to think critically.... you just lose out.
Oh fuck off you delusional old man
- you never had any problem with the simple majority until you were told to. And you fell in line.
- conservatives are proactively "protecting" the constitution from what the majority of people want
- as if you and other far right weirdos don't vote as some block either haha. This is coming from the guy that didn't like trump, called trump out, called him a con man. Etc. Then you know what this proud, free thinking lion did? He fell in line and voted with the rest of his block
-
Conservatives are great at
- falling for grifts
- getting fear mongered
- playing the victim card
- and acting like their belief is what the majority of Americans want but it isn't even close. Because they live sheltered little lives in their Facebook echo chambers
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login